Trump Administration Issues Executive Orders Directing Major Changes to Defense Acquisition and Federal Procurement More Broadly

The Trump administration has issued a series of executive orders (EOs) and other directives calling for major changes in the way the U.S. government procures goods and services. Among other things, President Trump has required consolidation of domestic federal procurement under the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA)¹ and instructed agencies to repeal “unlawful” regulations² and “remove anti-competitive barriers” that limit competition and make it difficult for companies to venture into the federal marketplace.³ This effort appears to have entered a new phase. In recent days, the administration has issued a framework for the “comprehensive overhaul” of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) contracting, and followed it up with a call for the “comprehensive reform” of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) government wide.

On April 9, 2025, President Trump issued an EO focused on “Modernizing Defense Acquisitions and Spurring Innovation in the Defense Industrial Base.”⁴ This EO seeks to address “our antiquated defense acquisition system” in order to “deliver state-of-the-art capabilities at speed and scale” to “strengthen our military edge,” and includes several directives that will impact defense contracting:

• A prioritization of commercial solutions, Other Transaction agreements (OTAs) and other streamlined acquisition methods
• A review of DoD regulations, including specifically the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), for elimination
• A “right-sizing” of the defense acquisition workforce and efforts to incentivize remaining personnel to innovate and “take measured and calculated risks”
• A review of major defense acquisition programs, including for potential cancellation, followed by a review of all remaining major systems

In recent days, President Trump has issued additional EOs seeking to implement similar goals in the context of federal procurement more broadly, including an EO titled “Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement” issued on April 15, 2025 that seeks to address “inadequacies” in the procurement system by reforming the FAR.⁵

Taken together, these EOs reflect the Trump administration’s focus on utilizing fast-track authorities for defense acquisition, while simultaneously streamlining existing regulations for FAR-based procurement across agencies more broadly. Existing contractors as well as the hoped-for new entrants must be prepared for a changing and potentially unpredictable marketplace, and they must adapt to new ways of selling in order to remain competitive.

I. Acquisition Process Reform

The April 9 DoD EO first directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a plan for acquisition process reform that incorporates three components.

First, DoD must utilize existing authorities to “expedite acquisitions” throughout DoD. This includes establishing a “first preference” for commercial solutions and a “general preference” for OTAs as well as implementation of Rapid Capabilities Office policies, which are intended to accelerate delivery of critical combat capabilities, and other streamlined contracting methods under the Adaptive Acquisition Framework (AAF). The AAF focuses on developing acquisition strategies and processes as tailored to the capability being acquired.⁶ The EO thus directs the movement of defense acquisition away from traditional negotiated procurement processes under the FAR in favor of less regulated contracting methods.⁷

Notably, the April 9 EO directs the Secretary to immediately prioritize such authorities “in all pending [DoD] contracting actions and require their application, where appropriate and consistent with applicable law” while the plan is being formulated.

This requirement aligns with the Secretary’s earlier directive to use commercial solutions and OTAs as the default method for DoD acquisition of software products.⁸ It also comes amid congressional efforts to similarly streamline DoD contracting.⁹ The Trump administration’s emphasis on commercial solutions is further underscored by a separate EO issued on April 16, 2025 titled “Ensuring Commercial, Cost-Effective Solutions In Federal Contracts.”¹⁰ The April 16 EO mandates a general review of non-commercial programs across all agencies, including ongoing procurements, to determine whether the procuring officials properly performed market research required under the 1994 Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act (FASA) to determine if the goods or services could feasibly be procured from the commercial marketplace.¹¹ The April 16 EO goes on to require agency officials to submit approval packages to the agency’s “approval authority” verifying in writing that the required market research has been done.

Second, the April 9 DoD EO requires that the plan for acquisition process reform include a “detailed process review” of “functional support roles” within the defense acquisition workforce. This review, which is intended to “eliminate unnecessary tasks, reduce duplicative approvals” and “centralize decision-making,” is required to include evaluations of program managers, contracting officers, engineering authorities, financial managers, cost estimators, and logisticians.

Third, DoD must conduct a detailed process to manage risk for defense acquisitions. The purpose of this process is to manage risk for “all acquisition programs” in the DoD by forming a “Configuration Steering Board.” It remains to be seen how this requirement will be read in conjunction with existing Configuration Steering Boards established by DoD Instruction 5000.85 for each DoD component.

II. Internal Regulations Review

The April 9 DoD EO also directs the reform of regulations that apply to defense acquisitions. Specifically, the EO directs the Secretary of Defense to oversee a review of DoD “instructions, implementation guides, manuals, and regulations relating to acquisition” and propose revisions “as appropriate” to: (a) eliminate or revise unnecessary supplemental regulations or any other internal guidance, including specifically from the DFARS and (b) promote expedited and streamlined acquisitions.

This effort is consistent with the Trump administration’s directive that agencies repeal “unlawful regulations,” which cites “the public’s interest” as a basis for bypassing the standard notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures.¹² For any new supplemental regulations or internal guidelines proposed, the April 9 EO directs DoD to adhere to the “ten-for-one rule” announced in a prior EO titled “Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,” which requires agencies to “identify at least 10 existing regulations to be repealed” for every one new regulation proposed.¹³

The more recent April 15 EO sets its sights on federal procurement more broadly by directing the reform of the FAR — the large, complex body of regulations governing procurement and management across the government. This EO mandates the FAR Council, i.e., the group of agency officials tasked to administer the FAR, to consult with agency heads to review and significantly revise the FAR, eliminating non-statutory provisions that are not “necessary to support simplicity and usability, strengthen the efficacy of the procurement system, or protect economic or national security interest.” The April 15 EO does not define all of the terms in this standard, but any FAR provision not mandated by statute will seemingly be a candidate for repeal. Indeed, this EO announces as a matter of policy that “the FAR should contain only provisions required by statute or essential to sound procurement, and any FAR provisions that do not advance these objectives should be removed.”

III. Acquisition Workforce Reform

The April 9 DoD EO also directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Component Acquisition Executives, to develop a plan for consideration by President Trump to “reform, right-size and train the acquisition work force.” The plan must include four components.

First, the plan must contemplate restructuring of performance evaluation metrics for the defense acquisition workforce to consider the personnel’s ability to demonstrate and apply a “first consideration” of commercial solutions, and implement the AAF and iterative requirements based on the end user’s perspective.

Second, DoD must analyze staff levels required to deliver, develop, and sustain warfighting capabilities. Without specifics, this requirement appears to signal a reduction of the existing workforce, which if true, would reflect a departure from the long-term efforts by DoD components to recruit new entrants into the acquisition workforce.¹⁴

Third, the plan must establish field training teams. These teams will be led by senior acquisition executives or managers with “expertise in innovation acquisition authorities and commercial solutions,” and will be tasked with providing “hands-on guidance, deliver templates and case studies of successful approaches for implementing innovative acquisition authorities” and assisting program teams to complete acquisition and sustainment tasks.

Fourth, DoD must develop and implement ways to incentivize acquisition officials. This includes policies, procedures, and tools for the defense acquisition workforce to, in good faith, utilize innovative acquisition authorities and “take measured and calculated risks.”

IV. Major Defense Acquisition Program Review

Lastly, the April 9 DoD EO directs the Secretary to undertake a comprehensive review of all major defense acquisition programs (MDAPs) as defined under 10 U.S.C. § 4201 to determine if any are inconsistent with the EO policy.¹⁵ More specifically, and of more direct effect, the Secretary must identify for cancellation any MDAP that is (a) more than 15% behind schedule; (b) more than 15% over cost, (c) unable to meet any key performance parameters, or (d) “unaligned with … mission priorities.” The Secretary must then deliver that “potential cancellation list” to the Director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for “future budget determinations.” The Secretary must also deliver to the OMB Director a list of all MDAPs contracts, with “performance against original and approved Government estimates.” The EO does not specify who will make final determinations regarding the programs on the list, or when.

The April 9 EO also states that once the review is complete, the Secretary must proceed with a plan for a similar review of “all remaining major systems” under 10 U.S.C. § 3041. Combined with MDAPs, the scope of this requirement will cover a significant portion of the DoD contracting portfolio.

This DoD-specific review is also consistent with the government-wide review of non-commercial programs directed by the separate April 16 EO, and several other EOs requiring a procurement-by-procurement assessment against standards of efficiency. As yet another example, an EO issued earlier this year on February 26, 2025 requires a lease-by-lease review by the head of GSA to determine which government leases can be terminated.¹⁶

*  * *

These EOs are the latest, and broadest yet in scope, of the efforts by President Trump to implement major changes to defense acquisition and federal procurement more broadly. The EOs build on other directives to call for the prioritization of commercial solutions and OTAs, while requiring a reform of regulations that currently govern FAR-based procurement across the government.

For many years now, contractors have prepared for a move away from traditional negotiated procurement processes as less conventional, fast-track authorities gained popularity. This trend is now policy for defense acquisition, as announced in the April 9 DoD EO. These changes may, as the Trump administration hopes, incentivize new entrants in the federal marketplace as opportunities shift away from existing regulatory obligations. Defense contractors in particular must continue preparing for the increased use of OTAs and other non-traditional methods. And all contractors must monitor the ongoing review of regulations impacting FAR-based contracting across the federal government, and pay close attention to any government-imposed changes to existing contracts and competitions. Careful tracking will enable existing contractors and new entrants alike to respond to government needs, as each agency implements the directives in these EOs in furtherance of the broad reforms the Trump administration seeks.

© Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP 2025 All Rights Reserved. This Advisory is intended to be a general summary of the law and does not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.